On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 12:51 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Trying to develop and document a set of standardized, stable hash
> functions covering a wide range of possible use cases sounds like it may
> be better served by an extension.
I suspect that some of the participants in this thread have PL/Proxy in
mind. PL/Proxy should probably ship its own set of hash functions.
If we ever get built-in partitioning by hash (see thread nearby and most
previous ones like it), we should also think about providing a hash
function that doesn't change output over versions and is independent of
hash index implementation concerns.